Line above text field in IE

[rf]

I'd have thought that would've been the first thing anybody suggested
to the OP.

Indeed. But, we had just got through the problem of whitespace between the
end of a particular element and a closing </td> tag (a totally known IE
issue) when the OP suddenly complicated matters by adding a form to the
already fragile layout.

The layout should be dumped IMHO. The possibility of a monitory refund from
the original perpetrators of this flawed design should be investigated.

 

[Neredbojias]

Indeed. But, we had just got through the problem of whitespace
between the end of a particular element and a closing </td> tag (a
totally known IE issue) when the OP suddenly complicated matters by
adding a form to the already fragile layout.

Right, and I saw your specific comment re. that which seem to go
ignored. When I cleaned the whitespace with developer, it wasn't what
was between the object and embed tags that mattered...

The layout should be dumped IMHO. The possibility of a monitory
refund from the original perpetrators of this flawed design should be
investigated.

Absolutely. Thats a pretty poor bit of markup even for an amateur. I
looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash rendering)
and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional - attractive. Good
commercial effort.

 

[rf]

On 21 Mar 2009, "rf" <[email protected]> wrote:

You've been very quite recently. Sabbatical?

Absolutely. That's a pretty poor bit of markup even for an amateur.

The really sad part is that these people really don't think they are
amateurs. They think they are professionals and they acuallly get away with
chargeing for this sort of stuff because nobody catches them out.

Until someone like the OP exposes one of their pages to, say, alt.html

I
looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash rendering)
and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional - attractive. Good
commercial effort.

I missed that one. URL? I always enjoy looking at Adriennes pages. They give
me inspiration.

 

[Adrienne Boswell]

Absolutely. Thats a pretty poor bit of markup even for an amateur. I
looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash rendering)
and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional - attractive. Good
commercial effort.

Gee, thanks! That really makes my morning.

 

[freemont]

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Neredbojias

Gee, thanks! That really makes my morning.

Adrienne, You might want to look at your site in Opera. Here's what I see:

http://i42.tinypic.com/108d5wg.jpg

Some of the borders on your left column are missing! I assume you
didn't intend this because the same thing doesn't happen in FF.

This is opera 9.64 on Mandriva 2009.0. HTH

 

[BootNic]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:03:25 -0400

[snip]

Looks fine here. Opera 9.64, Windows XP Pro.

I do not think the issue is dependent on the user agent.

The width of #navAlpha is set to 15%, while #content left margin is
set to 170px, with a wide enough view #navAlpha slides under
#content making it appear to be missing the right border.

--
BootNic Sat Mar 21, 2009 03:28 pm
Wife who put husband in doghouse soon find him in cat house.
*Ancient Chinese Proverbs*

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAknFP/0ACgkQylMUzZO6jeJ3mACgpeAnZL8pFjMCBCYEzjs9p7o3
vlkAoIPOaPJeo1D+dRPdA+6MCZayxMTh
=/WCy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Adrienne Boswell]

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed BootNic

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:03:25 -0400

[snip]

Adrienne, You might want to look at your site in Opera. Here's
what I see:

http://i42.tinypic.com/108d5wg.jpg

Some of the borders on your left column are missing! I
assume you didn't intend this because the same thing doesn't
happen in FF.

This is opera 9.64 on Mandriva 2009.0. HTH

Looks fine here. Opera 9.64, Windows XP Pro.

I do not think the issue is dependent on the user agent.

The width of #navAlpha is set to 15%, while #content left margin is
set to 170px, with a wide enough view #navAlpha slides under
#content making it appear to be missing the right border.

This is one of those things that I keep saying I'm going to do - give my
own web-site a makeover. Maybe I should hire Ty Pennington

 

[Neredbojias]

You've been very quite recently. Sabbatical?

Well, thought I'd tone it down a notch or 2. Bit of a burn-out,
perhaps; my posts were getting off-topic a lot and just plain silly
sometimes. Anyway, I intend to be more frugal with the words and less
opinionated, or at least try.

The really sad part is that these people really don't think they are
amateurs. They think they are professionals and they acuallly get
away with chargeing for this sort of stuff because nobody catches
them out.

Until someone like the OP exposes one of their pages to, say,
alt.html

I can forgive a bad amateur much easier than I can a bad professional.
Of course the sausage grinder that is alt.html would hardly let one
slip by "untenderized".

I missed that one. URL? I always enjoy looking at Adriennes pages.
They give me inspiration.

URL -, ok let's see...

http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php

(It's in the 1st message a couple threads before this one.)

 

[Neredbojias]

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Neredbojias


Gee, thanks! That really makes my morning.

It's a good piece of work so you deserve it.

 

[rf]

URL -, ok let's see...

http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php

Ah, yes, flash. I don't usually have flash enabled (that flashblock thing is
Wonderful). I'll just turn on the flash <clickety>.

Ah, yes, I remember why I installed flashblock in the first place. I have a
long history here of downcrying such continuously moving stuff. It IMHO
totally distracts from any other content that may be on the page. Just look
at [anything].cn for an example. If a client requests flash I refer said
client to somebody else. This is probably why I missed the post you mention,
the word "flash" in a subject line is an automatic filter to me. I didn't
even look at the post.

Remember me ranting a couple or five years ago about moving stuff and
tigers?

When we were all living in the jungle using brucies pointy stick to write
HTML anything moving in the surrounding area simply *had* to be be looked
at. It just might have been a tiger out lurking for its dinner. This inbuilt
propensity for looking at moving stuff still holds. Consider a bus, you
*always* look at one if it is moving near to you. Walk into a quiet
corporate office and pitch a tennis ball around the walls. Everybody that
has line of sight to that tennis ball *will* look at it, even if they are
currently listening carefully the profound advice being given out by the
CEO.

If you are looking at the moving stuff then you are not looking at the
content.

Unfortunately Adrienne's flash is so overpowering that I had to re-block the
flash just so I could type this post, even though the browsers window is two
screens that way ---> , our inbuilt reflex to look at stuff works even
better when said stuff is in the corner of ones eye. This is why I have the
TV currently replaying the Indian Wells semifinals *behind* me. I look at it
*if I wish*, not *when I must*.

Now, if the flash were to move just once and then say politely still...



Other than that, yes, the new page is quite a good one. Much cleaner that
what it looks like it is replacing.

 

[Adrienne Boswell]

URL -, ok let's see...

http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php

Ah, yes, flash. I don't usually have flash enabled (that flashblock
thing is Wonderful). I'll just turn on the flash <clickety>.

Ah, yes, I remember why I installed flashblock in the first place. I
have a long history here of downcrying such continuously moving stuff.
It IMHO totally distracts from any other content that may be on the
page. Just look at [anything].cn for an example. If a client requests
flash I refer said client to somebody else. This is probably why I
missed the post you mention, the word "flash" in a subject line is an
automatic filter to me. I didn't even look at the post.

Remember me ranting a couple or five years ago about moving stuff and
tigers?

Yes, I do, and I agree with you.

When we were all living in the jungle using brucies pointy stick to
write HTML anything moving in the surrounding area simply *had* to be
be looked at. It just might have been a tiger out lurking for its
dinner. This inbuilt propensity for looking at moving stuff still
holds. Consider a bus, you *always* look at one if it is moving near
to you. Walk into a quiet corporate office and pitch a tennis ball
around the walls. Everybody that has line of sight to that tennis ball
*will* look at it, even if they are currently listening carefully the
profound advice being given out by the CEO.

If you are looking at the moving stuff then you are not looking at the
content.

Unfortunately Adrienne's flash is so overpowering that I had to
re-block the flash just so I could type this post, even though the
browsers window is two screens that way ---> , our inbuilt reflex to
look at stuff works even better when said stuff is in the corner of
ones eye. This is why I have the TV currently replaying the Indian
Wells semifinals *behind* me. I look at it *if I wish*, not *when I
must*.

I'm going to recommend the static image that replaces the Flash image
when Flash is unavailable. Here it is with the static image:
http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php

Better?

Now, if the flash were to move just once and then say politely
still...

I could do that. That's a good idea.

Other than that, yes, the new page is quite a good one. Much cleaner
that what it looks like it is replacing.

Yes, my main thing was to get the page "alive" and more presentable.
The original image was just too dark, and IMHO, did not make anyone want
to buy shoes.

 

[Neredbojias]

URL -, ok let's see...

http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php

Ah, yes, flash. I don't usually have flash enabled (that flashblock
thing is Wonderful). I'll just turn on the flash <clickety>.

Ah, yes, I remember why I installed flashblock in the first place. I
have a long history here of downcrying such continuously moving
stuff. It IMHO totally distracts from any other content that may be
on the page. Just look at [anything].cn for an example. If a client
requests flash I refer said client to somebody else. This is probably
why I missed the post you mention, the word "flash" in a subject line
is an automatic filter to me. I didn't even look at the post.

Remember me ranting a couple or five years ago about moving stuff and
tigers?

Sure. All of your rants are rather memorable...

When we were all living in the jungle using brucies pointy stick to
write HTML anything moving in the surrounding area simply *had* to be
be looked at. It just might have been a tiger out lurking for its
dinner. This inbuilt propensity for looking at moving stuff still
holds. Consider a bus, you *always* look at one if it is moving near
to you. Walk into a quiet corporate office and pitch a tennis ball
around the walls. Everybody that has line of sight to that tennis
ball *will* look at it, even if they are currently listening
carefully the profound advice being given out by the CEO.

If you are looking at the moving stuff then you are not looking at
the content.

Unfortunately Adrienne's flash is so overpowering that I had to
re-block the flash just so I could type this post, even though the
browsers window is two screens that way ---> , our inbuilt reflex to
look at stuff works even better when said stuff is in the corner of
ones eye. This is why I have the TV currently replaying the Indian
Wells semifinals *behind* me. I look at it *if I wish*, not *when I
must*.

Well, in general I agree with you but honestly didn't think the Flash
on Ade's page was so bad. However, it's probably true that animation
should be kept out of normal "serious" pages at least without a start
and stop button.

Now, if the flash were to move just once and then say politely
still...

Yeah, better than continuous fer sure.

Other than that, yes, the new page is quite a good one. Much cleaner
that what it looks like it is replacing.

I'm growing to like Flash for things like music vids and such (-it's
good ((and necessary)) on You Tube, etc.) Still, I doubt if I'll ever
support any form of _autostart_ no matter where it is.